Morganton city leaders seek dismissal in lawsuit by Bella Vino owner

Five City of Morganton leaders are asking the court to throw out a civil lawsuit filed against them by Bella Vino owner Emmanuel Manolakas. A motion hearing has not been set as of Friday, Nov. 1.

Morganton City Manager Sally Sandy, Interim City Attorney Louis Vinay, Cultural and Creative Director Sharon Jablonski, Mayor Pro Tem Wendy Cato, and Morganton Councilman Chris Hawkins have been individually named in a civil suit by the owner of Bella Vino Trattoria & Wine Garden alleging defamation, unfair business practices, malicious prosecution, and abuse of legal processes that have damaged the business.

The lawsuit were filed July 25 by plaintiff attorney Matthew K. Rogers of Hickory on behalf of Manolakas and Xristou Menton, Inc. (dba Bella Vino Trattoria & Wine Garden).

Rogers was unable to comment due to out-of-office obligations.

Representing the officials in this matter is Asheville-based attorney Adam Peoples, of Hall Booth Smith law firm, which defends governmental liability among other focuses.

According to the consolidated motion filings on Monday, Oct. 14, at the Burke County Courthouse, the defendants request that:

• The matter is to be dismissed for failure to state a claim where relief can be granted
• If not dismissed, the matter is to be “stayed” or held pending the outcome of the City’s appeal of the May 30 verdict judgment
• The matter to be transferred to Burke’s Superior Court division for proper jurisdiction
• The cost of this action along with the defendants’ reasonable attorney fees be taxed against the plaintiffs
• The defendants should recover and have any further relief that the Court deems proper

The first case centers on the two-week Burke County District Court jury trial in which the City was found guilty of breach of contract with Bella Vino and ordered to pay a judgment of $705,000 plus 8% interest compounded daily.

Presiding Judge Wesley Barkley oversaw the proceedings. The City has since filed a notice of appeal and is awaiting an answer.

“It’s our position that this second lawsuit is largely redundant of the first,” Peoples said. “To the extent it is duplicative, we believe it is improper. Independently, there are a variety of legal reasons why many of the claims should be dismissed. To the extent we can dispose of claims at this early stage, we aim to do so.

“If any of the Plaintiffs’ claims survive our motion to dismiss, to the extent those claims relate to the first lawsuit, we are asking the Court to stay further litigation (as in, freeze in time, no deadlines, no hearings) until the first lawsuit is fully resolved. That protects us from having to fight the same battle on two fronts.”

Peoples explained that Manolakas should have raised the claims in the personal lawsuits at the time of his case against the City. He compared this matter to an insurance claim in a car wreck. If you file a claim and accept the insurance payout, you cannot turn around and sue the person who hit you and obtain a second settlement.

“Every party in North Carolina is entitled to a single recovery,” he stated.

Regarding the motion for a transfer of jurisdiction, the District Court typically handles family disputes such as child support/custody, and divorce along with some criminal misdemeanors. The defense attorney said Superior Court is the more appropriate venue for this case.

“... As you might imagine, the District Court already has a significant caseload. Moving this case to Superior Court frees up the District Court’s resources to serve the community that most needs it,” Peoples said.

If the court denies all the motions, Peoples said they would re-evaluate their options at that time.